Rachel Alexandra (116 Beyer for Haskell)

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I think that not running her in the BC is acting in the best interests of racing. Awarding the BC two years in a row to SA and a synthetic track was in the best interests of California but not in the best interests of the sport as a whole. Perhaps by not only voicing his displeasure but by keeping the star attraction out, the powers that be will think twice about doing something this stupid again and that would be in the best interests of the sport.

I understand what you are saying but you are assuming that this will change anything. It wont. There is no doubt that the Breeders Cup board will make stupid mistakes again and the thing will be held at a synthetic track but there may not be another chance to showcase a RA, who is not only growing into a star attraction but a legitimate one.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

there may not be another chance to showcase a RA,

Showcase her as the horse who finishes a bad 4th of 7 in the Distaff - or a bad 11th of 14 in the Classic?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Showcase her as the horse who finishes a bad 4th of 7 in the Distaff - or a bad 11th of 14 in the Classic?

Assman has been doing very well on the AP poly 42 9 8 5

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Assman has been doing very well on the AP poly 42 9 8 5

Great.

He's 4-for-9 in maiden claiming races and 4-for-13 in regular claiming races.

The other win with a 2yo sprinters.

But hey, it's vast improvement from his 9-for-90 meet at Arlington in 2008 and his 12-for-101 with a $0.96 ROI meet at Arlington in 2007.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I understand what you are saying but you are assuming that this will change anything. It wont. There is no doubt that the Breeders Cup board will make stupid mistakes again and the thing will be held at a synthetic track but there may not be another chance to showcase a RA, who is not only growing into a star attraction but a legitimate one.

I don't really have as big a problem with synthetic tracks as I do with the fact that the supposed championships are being held on them when the majority of our main track stars run primarily on dirt. The thing that I don't like is what the BC is trying to do, what they've publicly stated is their goal and that's trying to cater to the Europeans. Well, last year they achieved their goal and likely will again this year but it's going to be at the cost of some top American horses, in this case, the biggest star we have. I think that all of the people who want to see Rachel will know how to see her. I think the biggest difference of opinion you have with the rest of us is in how much extra viewership there would be if Rachel were to run. My opinion is that it wouldn't be a significant number and that an even less significant number would continue to tune in after that to see races that she's not in. It's sort of like with Tiger Woods. Before him, I didn't watch golf. Now, I do. Only when he's playing. When he missed the cut at the British Open, I didn't watch the weekend. When there's no Tiger, there's no me. And the ratings show that I'm not alone in this.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

It's sort of like with Tiger Woods. Before him, I didn't watch golf. Now, I do. Only when he's playing. When he missed the cut at the British Open, I didn't watch the weekend. When there's no Tiger, there's no me. And the ratings show that I'm not alone in this.

The ratings for the Buick Open over the past weekend were up 167%... that's insane. Tiger has power. Stars have power. No stars = less power. It's pretty basic.

The debate whether or not Rachel Alexandra running in the Breeders' Cup is good/bad for horse racing is a moot point. No one in a million years can argue that Rachel Alexandra in the gate would have a negative impact on the success of the Breeders' Cup, whether you define success as viewers, fans on the rail, programs sold or handle dollars.

The bottom line in all of this is racing has created, through various evolutions of its racing calendar and schedule, a distorted and lopsided approach to promoting its racing on a daily/weekly basis, and in turn, has eroded the ability to market the basics of our game to the general public.

Back on point, the best thing for racing is Rachel Alexandra in the starting gate for the Classic. But the Classic is on synthetics, and right now, she's a superstar on dirt. So therefore the best thing for racing is not to have the Classic on synthetics, but unfortunately it is. So therefore the best thing... this is all a slippery slope.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The ratings for the Buick Open over the past weekend were up 167%... that's insane. Tiger has power. Stars have power. No stars = less power. It's pretty basic.

The debate whether or not Rachel Alexandra running in the Breeders' Cup is good/bad for horse racing is a moot point. No one in a million years can argue that Rachel Alexandra in the gate would have a negative impact on the success of the Breeders' Cup, whether you define success as viewers, fans on the rail, programs sold or handle dollars.

The bottom line in all of this is racing has created, through various evolutions of its racing calendar and schedule, a distorted and lopsided approach to promoting its racing on a daily/weekly basis, and in turn, has eroded the ability to market the basics of our game to the general public.

Back on point, the best thing for racing is Rachel Alexandra in the starting gate for the Classic. But the Classic is on synthetics, and right now, she's a superstar on dirt. So therefore the best thing for racing is not to have the Classic on synthetics, but unfortunately it is. So therefore the best thing... this is all a slippery slope.

Well said..A man who understands that horses that excell on dirt don't necessarily excell on Pro Ride.. BTW suggesting that Rachel is ok on Pro Ride because she beat vermin is different then thinking she will be able to beat horses that can and will excell on it.

[10 pnt move up]

Bottom Line is horse racing is mired in problems that no one really cares to fix, they all are trying to save themselves with slots. There is not enough time in the day to complain about all that is wrong with horse racing. Anyone getting into this sport as a fan and a gambler should have their head examined.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I understand what you are saying but you are assuming that this will change anything. It wont. There is no doubt that the Breeders Cup board will make stupid mistakes again and the thing will be held at a synthetic track but there may not be another chance to showcase a RA, who is not only growing into a star attraction but a legitimate one.

i don't know that jess is trying to change anything, he just doesn't want to see another of his best possibly get beaten on a surface he detests. and i don't remember seeing all this furor over mineshaft when he didn't go.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i don't know that jess is trying to change anything, he just doesn't want to see another of his best possibly get beaten on a surface he detests. and i don't remember seeing all this furor over mineshaft when he didn't go.

Mineshaft was hurt. He didn't just pass the race.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Mineshaft was hurt. He didn't just pass the race.

news to me. they passed up the race because of the rock hard surface. he had chips, but it didn't keep him from running all year.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Danzig

news to me. they passed up the race because of the rock hard surface. he had chips, but it didn't keep him from running all year.

You're right, and he was at the end of the line after the JC Gold Cup. He wasn't going to run on a rock-hard track at Santa Anita.